"Speaking at TechEd, the software giant's annual conference for information technology administrators, Andy Lees, vice president of the company's server and tools business, said Microsoft will now guarantee a minimum of 10 years of support for all business and developer products."
This would presumably include VFP? Does anyone know for sure? Ten is a nice round number...
(first time I have posted here - if any etiquette violations, let me know...)
That's just fine, Joe. Welcome!-- Steven Black
-- June 2003 --
I don't know what's up at MS but recent observations seem to suggest some unpublished changes have been implemented that hinder rather than help efforts to remain abreast of VFP anomolies. Is anyone aware of some change in policy at MS that might affect the treatment of non-.NET products (or just VFP) as regards documentation and support?
The MSDN Library - April 2003 has only VERY sparse content for MSKB Articles relating to VFP. I came up with approx. 18 articles with "VFP' and one of "PRB:" or "BUG:" or "FIX:" compared to well over 300 articles in the MSDN Library - April 2002 edition.
Now none of those 18 articles were directly related to VFP, but rather to other products like VSS or VS6 or Office (ODBC stuff I think) etc.
And in many cases the main article held references to VFP articles yet clicking on such links often gave a message that the subject article is not in the MSDN release but may be found at an(other) online site. A link is provided to the site but one has to enter product name, article ID, etc. at that link.
[2003.06.05 08:06:19 AM EST] Take, also, the MSKB article Q190496 which is not on the MSDN - April 2003 issue. It **is** available through the web.
However, the article lists VFP3.0, VFP3.0b, VFP5.0, VFP5.0a and VFP6.0 as being the pertinent VFP versions.
Note too that the article's title is: "PRB: SEEK Finds Old and New Data With Optimistic Buffering" and since it says "PRB:" (not "FIX:") the reader seems correct in assuming that it remains a problem.
Finally, note that the article's "Last Reviewed" (date) is 5/12/2003, which I interpret as May 12, 2003. Since it was reviewed so recently one cannot help but ask Where is VFP 7.0 and VFP8 in the list of pertinent versions? I wonder what is 'reviewed' when they say "Last Reviewed"???
Yesterday, to our huge benefit, came 3 MSKB Articles summarizing fixes (around 200 I'd guess) that have been implemented in VFP8. I never saw such a list for VFP7 so to me this represents good progress.
Yet these Fix Lists have one oddity - none have a reference (link) to a KB Article providing additional details about the specific fix.
I suppose that the reason could be that none of the fixes listed ever were the subject of a KB article in the first place. It has been my observation that KB articles regarding VFP have been few and far between since VFP went "out of the box" (VS box, that is).
Another possible oddity is that the keywords list at the bottom of the articles show "kbinfo", "KBnnnnnn" (nnnnnn is the KB article number) and "kbAudDeveloper". What are these???
I have been told many times by the defenders of MS' customer relations practises that MSKB Articles are the responsibility of some other department (PSS?) at MS. Allowing this to be the case, then the dearth of VFP articles since VFP7 came out is squarely attributable to that other department (I understand that VFP Team members do write MSKB articles too but any I've seen were more of the "HOWTO" variety). -- Jim Nelson
As usual, Jim, you are reading far too much into things. There is no attempt to coverup VFP anomalies.
None of this would be happening if Ken Levy were alive. -- Steven Black
and your point is?
William Sanders says:
Gosh - did you know ? The entire MSDN online library went to sh|te 3 months ago during a 'restructuring' and it made it 'harder' to use the 'search engine' there. Why not try again ? today ? [05-27-04] ?
So why not use Google instead?
Try it like this to search one site:
-- Alex Feldstein
Category VFP Marketing
( Topic last updated: 2004.05.27 09:34:07 PM )